Ultra-Wide-Angle Zooms - the benefits, as opposed to the deficits ...
Apr 19, 2019 18:54:30 #
Pistnbroke wrote:
Well 24 MP spread over an image cannot give the quality of 46 spread over the same image. If you are serious about wide angle you need FX or MF. But if you are happy with your DX so am I .
Seems you don't fully understand quality.
Apr 19, 2019 19:10:25 #
User ID wrote:
Toadall BS
According to all comers - one of the best UWA-Zs EVER made - is the Canon 10-22 …
To many, it compares to the best L lenses out there …
I suspect, many Canon users (even those who also have 5Ds and 1Ds) use that lens on an APS-C body - when they want to shoot ultra-wide …
So, in some respects, I do agree with you, User … even though you've chosen to address this in a neg way!
Apr 19, 2019 19:25:10 #
Chris T wrote:
Pistn … a 46MP sensor packs more pixels into the same area as a 24MP FF sensor, thereby - the pixels have to be smaller. In a less densely packed sensor, the individual pixels are larger, thereby, lending to a higher quality image.
So if image quality is what you are after a 24mp full frame camera will produce a better image than a 24mp crop sensor camera. Time to upgrade!
---
Apr 19, 2019 19:31:54 #
Bill_de wrote:
So if image quality is what you are after a 24mp full frame camera will produce a better image than a 24mp crop sensor camera. Time to upgrade!
---
---
Well, it could be said a 12MP camera, using even LESS pixels than a 24MP camera - produces a better image, still … so, if you buy that argument - no need to upgrade, as I already HAVE one!!!!!
Apr 19, 2019 19:40:57 #
Chris T wrote:
Well, it could be said a 12MP camera, using even LESS pixels than a 24MP camera - produces a better image, still … so, if you buy that argument - no need to upgrade, as I already HAVE one!!!!!
But even then, based on your thinking, a 12mp full frame should be better. Try one for yourself instead of just making statements based on what you read on the internet. You might like it.
By the way, have you confirmed that fewer pixels automatically means larger pixels. Couldn't it just, in some cases, be a larger pixel pitch.
Size wise the pixels in the D850 are very close to the same size as those in the D500.
---
Apr 19, 2019 19:55:09 #
Bill_de wrote:
But even then, based on your thinking, a 12mp full frame should be better. Try one for yourself instead of just making statements based on what you read on the internet. You might like it.
By the way, have you confirmed that fewer pixels automatically means larger pixels. Couldn't it just, in some cases, be a larger pixel pitch.
Size wise the pixels in the D850 are very close to the same size as those in the D500.
---
By the way, have you confirmed that fewer pixels automatically means larger pixels. Couldn't it just, in some cases, be a larger pixel pitch.
Size wise the pixels in the D850 are very close to the same size as those in the D500.
---
Well, then - if that be the case, Bill … I'll rush right out and buy a D500, and save myself about one-and-a-half grand on that overpriced D850!!!!
Apr 19, 2019 20:06:19 #
Gene51 wrote:
Ultrawides are pretty specialized lenses and only a relatively small percentage of photographers are actually successful using them. Lots of anamorphosis, complex distortion, uneven brightness across the frame, etc and a completely unrealistic perspective. I prefer to use a longer lens and simply stitch images for wider views. Most of the deficits come from shooters not fully understanding how to make good images with them.
Hi Gene. In reading your comment I started wondering if I was one of those shooters you allude to above. I use a Canon 10-22 and I have always thought my pics with it were some of the most amazingly replicated vistas anywhere remotely comparable to what my eyes were actually seeing. But maybe I am blind to the flaws in my own work? I am not familiar with anamorphosis and I think complex distortion is the curvature that can be induced by UWA lenses but not 100%. Uneven brightness....not sure about that one either. The seascape is brighter on one side because the sun is just out of frame and that is how it looked in real life. Just trying to gain understanding of these terms as they may relate to images I have taken.....helps me to comprehend. Any insight you don't mind sharing would be wonderful. Thank you.
1/125s @ f11; ISO 100; 22mm; Rebel T1i
1/200s @f14; ISO 100; 10mm; Rebel T1i
Apr 19, 2019 20:06:21 #
Chris T wrote:
Well, then - if that be the case, Bill … I'll rush right out and buy a D500, and save myself about one-and-a-half grand on that overpriced D850!!!!
I guess you will never grasp the advantages of a larger sensor if you never use one.
---
Apr 19, 2019 21:24:31 #
Bill_de wrote:
I know the advantages - my wallet knows the disadvantages. I have better uses for the $$$$.I guess you will never grasp the advantages of a larger sensor if you never use one.
---
---
Apr 19, 2019 21:34:32 #
rehess wrote:
I know the advantages - my wallet knows the disadvantages. I have better uses for the $$$$.
Now that is an intelligent answer.
You have to know the advantages to make a good decision.
---
Apr 19, 2019 21:50:40 #
Bill_de wrote:
I guess you will never grasp the advantages of a larger sensor if you never use one.
---
---
I don't NEED a larger sensor than APS-C for digital …
When I have need for larger formats - I have a 4x5, and a 5x7, and a 6x7 Pentax …
Each fills the need for larger format, far better than the ever-so-slight diff between APS-C and FF …
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.